Feds Interview "Several Witnesses" Who Support Dawn Zimmer's Account

[kpete]

Federal authorities in New Jersey have interviewed several witnesses who said the mayor of Hoboken told them in May about a state official’s threat to withhold hurricane recovery funds if the mayor did not support a development project favored by the governor, people briefed on the matter said on Wednesday.

The statements by the witnesses, two of whom are aides to the mayor, Dawn Zimmer, support the account she gave to federal prosecutors on Sunday, and the interviews suggest that prosecutors and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have moved swiftly to investigate her accusations.

MORE:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/23/nyregion/hoboken-mayor-is-said-to-have-told-of-threat.html?_r=0



*******************

According to the report, Dan Bryan, Zimmer’s chief of staff, and Juan Melli, her communications director, are among at least five witnesses Zimmer told the FBI could confirm earlier conversations she said she had about the threats from the administration.

http://crooksandliars.com/2014/01/fbi-questions-aides-hoboken-mayor-dawn

[WillyT]

1. K & R !!!

[randome]

2. Not sure how they can be called 'witnesses' since they did not witness anything.

But as 'corroborating witnesses', this sounds good.

Christie's next task is to fire his Lt. Governor for not telling him about this.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[Swede Atlanta]

3. The Lt. Governor/Governor's defense goes like this....

the only known "evidence" that the Lt. Governor pressured the mayor by tying relief funds to support for a project favored by the Governor (or at least the administration), is the mayor's diary. It is still just her record of events from that encounter.

What the pukes are using to defend the governor are statements like "who keeps a diary these days" and "she could have just inserted those pages now and make it look like it was entered months ago".

So having other "witnesses" attest that either prior to or contemporaneous with the alleged date of the entry in the mayor's diary, a discussion or comments made by the mayo to others, strengthens the credibility at least that the mayor truthfully believed linkage was being asserted by the Lt. Governor and that her entry is not likely to have been entered "after the fact".

[randome]

4. Oh, they will find some other conspiracy theory to latch onto.

"It was all a long-range plot!" "They're all in on it because they hate Christie and his size frightens them!"

But yeah, you're right, it lends credibility to Zimmer. Not that she needed any in our book. From what we've learned, she's always been a straight-shooter.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[Jim Lane]

5. If there's a trial, their statements are hearsay but would probably be admissible anyway.

Hearsay is, roughly, testimony by a witness who lacks first-hand knowledge but who says "So-and-so told me thus-and-such."

Generally speaking, hearsay is not admissible. One exception, however, is made when there's a charge of recent fabrication -- a witness who does have first-hand knowledge testifies, and the other side argues that the witness is lying, and made up the story for purposes of the trial. If that argument is made, it opens the door to prior consistent statements, that is, testimony by people who lack first-hand knowledge but who can testify that the witness who's now being challenged did say the same thing back then.

This case is a good illustration. With Bridgegate surfacing, it's not implausible that a Democratic mayor would make up a story about earlier corruption, knowing that the lie would now find ready ears. It's harder to see, however, why the mayor would, months ago, have made up a story, told a few friends about it, and then done nothing further. The additional witnesses' testimony, if believed, makes Zimmer's testimony more credible.

[aquart]

9. They can testify to how upset Zimmer was and what Zimmer said about it.

That she was both outraged and intimidated. And disappointed.

[SCVDem]

6. Zimmer just doesn't have the political clout

To make people commit perjury or lie to the FBI.

Who in New Jersey does, I wonder?

[Ikonoklast]

8. Occam's Razor comes to mind. Why would anyone risk federal charges over such a thing?

Corroborating witnesses especially.

[Enrique]

15. i know who you have in mind

Jon Bon Jovi.

[bamasher]

7. "Show Me the Money"

I don't understand. Either the mayor received Sandy relief funds for Hoboken, or she didn't. There should be a great big wide paper trail. If her allegations are false then all the Governor's office has to do is provide documentation showing that an appropriate amount of relief funding was indeed transferred to the stricken city entity. Case closed.

[truebluegreen]

10. She didn't.

Enough for one back-up generator and one study. For a town that was 80% underwater.

Odd that the governor's office has been pointing out "$70 million in federal funds" were received without mentioning those funds were federal flood insurance, not Sandy aid, don't you agree?

[aquart]

12. Yup.

[aquart]

11. She didn't. Individual persons and businesses did receive payouts from flood insurance.

Not a dime of which was under Christie's control. The money Christie did have, for Hoboken to use to prevent this flooding in future, that was withheld. His statement was deliberately misleading.

[truebluegreen]

13. Great minds...

[AlbertCat]

14. All of this...and more... is......

the result of 30 years of Reagan's "greed is good" meme mixed with 8 years of Bush's "do whatever you want" administration.

[Javaman]

16. christy is done. no way he's going scrape any of this off. nt

[Cha]

17. Thank Goodness she communicated it to her aides and staff!

And, wrote it in her journal!